Return to owner

•The repossession of Benin bronzes is a good start and must be built upon

One of the more negative consequences of colonial conquest was the theft of the cultural artefacts of conquered people by those who had invaded them. The 1897 invasion, sacking and looting of the Benin Kingdom by British forces ranks among the most traumatic instances of this painful reality. It is all the more gratifying that a small, but significant step was taken to achieve healing and restitution.

The occasion was the formal return of two bronze artefacts by a great-grandson of one of the invading British soldiers, Dr. Adrian Mark Walker, to the Oba of Benin, Uku Akpolokpolo Erediauwa I. Dr. Walker’s explanation of his unusual action was as simple as it was right: he felt that the acquisition of the artefacts was an injustice which he had to correct.

It takes a great amount of courage to publicly admit that one’s ancestors were wrong; it takes even greater bravery to seek to make restitution for such errors. Walker’s gesture is a welcome manifestation of the culture of reconciliation that has become vital to the resolution of long-standing resentments and simmering hatreds that continue to make the lasting resolution of many conflicts so difficult. He made no excuses for the behaviour of his great-grandfather or the nation that sent him; he did not demand compensation for an ostensible “loss;” he did not question the right of the Benin Kingdom to its own artefacts. He just went ahead and did the right thing: he returned the artefacts to their rightful owners.

By his actions, Walker has unwittingly given the world a useful template with which to resolve the vexed issue of returning stolen cultural treasures to their places of origin. Over the years, the countries in which these treasures are held have persistently refused to hand them back, and have disingenuously relied on several untenable justifications.

They argue that the artefacts are legitimate spoils of war; that they alone can maintain and display them appropriately; that those from whom the artefacts were stolen are no longer around to demand their return. When Nigeria was put in the humiliating position of having to request that Britain loan it the magnificent Queen Idia mask for use in FESTAC ’77, it was turned down. Walker has shown that none of these excuses is justifiable or reasonable. If the provenance of an artefact can be precisely determined, and if the descendants of the original owners can be located, then it is incumbent upon those who currently possess them to return them. It is as simple as that.

It is significant that Dr. Walker’s courage was matched by Benin magnanimity. The Oba of Benin, as well as the Governor of Edo State, Mr. Adams Oshiomhole, warmly congratulated Walker for what he had done, and encouraged others in similar situations to imitate his sterling behaviour. Such generosity of spirit on both sides of the issue is vital to ensuring that it does not degenerate into a blame-game that will do neither party any good.

Nigeria must do more to ensure that more of its treasures that have been spirited beyond its shores in dubious circumstances are brought back to the country. It must strengthen its capacity to accommodate and maintain artefacts, enhance its ability to monitor them locally and internationally, and improve co-operative relationships with foreign governments and institutions.

In this regard, it is truly distressing that artefacts continue to be stolen from palaces and museums, only to show up in museums and collections abroad. Nigeria’s claims to its illegally appropriated cultural heritage will be hollow if it does nothing to protect those that are still within its borders.